0
   

Dems in mortal fear of voter ID

 
 
Reply Wed 4 Jan, 2012 07:54 am
http://townhall.com/columnists/robertknight/2012/01/04/democrats_are_terrified_of_voter_id

Quote:
The most consequential election in our lifetime is still 11 months away, but it’s clear from the Obama administration’s order halting South Carolina’s new photo ID law that the Democrats have already brought a gun to the knife fight.

How else to describe this naked assault on the right of a state to create minimal requirements to curb voter fraud?

On Dec. 23, Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez sent a letter ordering South Carolina to stop enforcing its photo ID law. Perez, who heads the Civil Rights division that booted charges against the New Black Panther Party for intimidating voters in Philadelphia in 2008, alleged that South Carolina’s law would disenfranchise thousands of minority voters.

South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson rejected Perez’s math and explained on Fox News why the law is necessary. The state Department of Motor Vehicles audited a state Election Commission report that said 239,333 people were registered to vote but had no photo ID. The DMV found that 37,000 were deceased, more than 90,000 had moved to other states, and others had names not matched to IDs. That left only 27,000 people registered without a photo ID but who could vote by signing an affidavit as to their identity.

Wilson told me by phone on Thursday that he would file a challenge to the order in federal district court in January. Asked whether he felt South Carolina was being singled out, he declined to speculate on motives. However, citing the National Labor Relations Board’s orders to invalidate the voter-approved union card check amendment and to stop a new Boeing plant, and the Justice Department’s suit to halt the immigration law, he said, “there certainly is a pattern of the federal government overreaching into South Carolina.”

Leading Democrats loudly equate recently enacted photo ID legislation as updated versions of Jim Crow laws that once robbed people of their constitutional right to vote simply because of their race. But photo ID laws and other voter integrity measures cover everyone. Like other states, South Carolina provides photo IDs if a person cannot afford one.

The U.S. Constitution empowers the states to enact voting procedures with minimal input from the national government, such as setting the voting age and election days for federal offices. The Fifteenth and Nineteenth amendments ensure that no one is denied the right to vote based on race or sex.
 
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Reply Wed 4 Jan, 2012 09:39 am
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
Asked whether he felt South Carolina was being singled out, he declined to speculate on motives. However, citing the National Labor Relations Board’s orders to invalidate the voter-approved union card check amendment and to stop a new Boeing plant, and the Justice Department’s suit to halt the immigration law, he said, “there certainly is a pattern of the federal government overreaching into South Carolina.”

I'm surprised that the attorney general of South Carolina is evidently not familiar with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Well, somewhat surprised.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jan, 2012 02:35 pm
The south shall rise again.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jan, 2012 02:46 pm
@joefromchicago,
Joe:
Just about anything that happened in the USA before Reagan is lost on South Carolinians. They have a vague grasp of a memory regarding something about something called a State's Right to Pretty Much Be A Country of Its Own Making or some such thing. It didn't go well and they are still unhappy over that.

They also wish they had thought up Coca Cola before the Atlantians did.

Joe(whenever that was)Nation
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jan, 2012 10:40 pm
2008 Senate election, same thing happens in SC and Minnesota, very close election, SC deals with it in a rational and civilized manner, business settled in a runoff election two weeks later, case closed; the **** in Minn. drags on for weeks and months until Al Franken is declared the winner despite having clearly lost the election and that after a 3'rd party candidate took 15% of the vote which clearly would otherwise have gone to Coleman.

I mean, which of the two states is modern/sophisticated and which is a backwards collection of neanderthal rednecks who lack any clue as to how to operate democratic institutions?
joefromchicago
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 Jan, 2012 11:34 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
I mean, which of the two states is modern/sophisticated and which is a backwards collection of neanderthal rednecks who lack any clue as to how to operate democratic institutions?

This is a trick question, right?
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jan, 2012 09:14 am
@joefromchicago,
I suppose a dopey enough person could view it as a trick question....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Dems in mortal fear of voter ID
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/10/2024 at 02:23:43